Evaluating the effects of rater and subject factors on measures of association.

Large-scale agreement studies are becoming increasingly common in medical settings to gain better insight into discrepancies often observed between experts' classifications. Ordered categorical scales are routinely used to classify subjects' disease and health conditions. Summary measures such as Cohen's weighted kappa are popular approaches for reporting levels of association for pairs of raters' ordinal classifications. However, in large-scale studies with many raters, assessing levels of association can be challenging due to dependencies between many raters each grading the same sample of subjects' results and the ordinal nature of the ratings. Further complexities arise when the focus of a study is to examine the impact of rater and subject characteristics on levels of association. In this paper, we describe a flexible approach based upon the class of generalized linear mixed models to assess the influence of rater and subject factors on association between many raters' ordinal classifications. We propose novel model-based measures for large-scale studies to provide simple summaries of association similar to Cohen's weighted kappa while avoiding prevalence and marginal distribution issues that Cohen's weighted kappa is susceptible to. The proposed summary measures can be used to compare association between subgroups of subjects or raters. We demonstrate the use of hypothesis tests to formally determine if rater and subject factors have a significant influence on association, and describe approaches for evaluating the goodness-of-fit of the proposed model. The performance of the proposed approach is explored through extensive simulation studies and is applied to a recent large-scale cancer breast cancer screening study.